« Civilization is a certain cultural entity. Villages, regions, ethnic groups, peoples, religious communities - they all have a special culture, reflecting different levels of cultural heterogeneity... We can define a civilization as a cultural community of the highest rank, as the broadest level of cultural identity of people. The next stage is what distinguishes the human race from other types of living beings. Civilizations are determined by the presence of common features of an objective order, such as language, history, religion, customs, institutions, as well as the subjective self-identification of people. There are different levels of self-identification: for example, a resident of Rome can characterize himself as a Roman, an Italian, a Catholic, a Christian, a European, a person of the Western world. Civilization is the broadest level of community with which he relates himself . People's cultural self-identification can change, and as a result, the composition and boundaries of a particular civilization change».

In A. Toynbee’s concept, civilizations are formed and develop in response to socio-cultural “ challenges», when they are led by a creative minority, and die when the leaders cease to meet socio-historical needs. Thus, analyzing the origins of development twenty-one civilizations allocated by him , the scientist highlights the challenges first of the natural and then of the human environment. The first challenges that can be recorded in history were made by the deltas of the rivers - the Nile, Jordan, Tigris and Euphrates, the Indus with its once existing parallel channel. These rivers cross shallow steppes such as the arid Afro-Asian steppe. In the Nile Delta, the answer was the genesis of the Egyptian civilizations, in the Tigris and Euphrates valley - the Sumerian, in the Indus Valley and its former tributary - the Indus culture (assuming that the latter is not a branch of the Sumerian civilization, but has independent and independent roots). After the end of the Ice Age, the Afro-Asian territory began to experience severe climate changes. This led to the drying up of the lands.

Rice. 1. "Arnold Joseph Toynbee(English Arnold Joseph Toynbee; April 14 - October 22) - British historian, philosopher of history, cultural scientist and sociologist, author of a twelve-volume work on the comparative history of civilizations “Comprehension of History”, one of the developers of civilization theory. Awarded the Order of the Knights of Honor. Biography: Born in London. Nephew of the famous researcher of economic history and supporter of social reform for the betterment of the working class, Arnold Toynbee. He studied at Winchester and Balliol College in Oxford, where he began teaching in the city, then at King's College, where he taught the history of the Middle Ages and Byzantium. In 1913 he married Gilbert Murray's daughter Rosalind Murray (†1967). From 1919 to 1924 he taught at the University of London. He worked at the London School of Economics and the Royal Institute of International Affairs (RIIA) at Chatham House, where he was director from 1929 to 1929. Author of numerous studies on historical, philosophical, sociological and political issues. The position of a specialist scientist involved in world politics at the highest level (an expert at the Paris Peace Conferences of 1919 and 1946) largely determined the nature and scope of his historical thinking. Consistently wrote and published parts of the philosophical and historical work “Comprehension of History” (vol. 1-12, 1934-1961). He began this research in 1927. The results are summarized in the book “Changes and Habits” (1966). In “Comprehension of History” he developed and presented his own theory of civilization... Toynbee viewed world history as a system of conventionally distinguished civilizations, passing through the same phases from birth to death and making up the branches of the “single tree of history.” Civilization, according to Toynbee, is a closed society, characterized by two main criteria: 1) religion and the form of its organization; 2) territorial characteristic, the degree of remoteness from the place where a given society originally arose . Toynbee identifies 21 civilizations… Toynbee about Russia: For example, Toynbee viewed communism as “ counterstrike”, pushing back what the West imposed in the 18th century. in Russia. The expansion of communist ideas is only one of the inevitable responses to the contradiction “between Western civilization as the aggressor and other civilizations as victims.” A witness to the demise of Victorian England, two world wars and the collapse of the colonial system, Toynbee argued that “at the height of its power, the West is confronted with non-Western countries that have enough drive, will and resources to give the world a non-Western shape.” Toynbee predicted that in the 21st century. "The challenge that will define history will be Russia, which has put forward its own ideals (which the West is not eager to embrace), the Islamic world and China." .

During this era, where primitive societies had previously existed, two or more civilizations arose. Archaeological research makes it possible to consider the process of land drying as a challenge, the answer to which was the emergence of civilizations. The hunter-gatherer communities of the Afro-Asian savannas, without changing either their location or their way of life in response to the challenge, died out. But those who changed their way of life, turning from hunters to shepherds, skillfully leading their herds along the seasonal migration route, became the nomads of the Arabian steppe. There were communities that responded to the challenge of drought by changing community and lifestyle, and this rare dual response signified the dynamic act that, from the vanishing primitive societies of the Afro-Asian steppe, gave birth to the Ancient Egyptian and Sumerian civilizations. Changing lifestyles stimulated the creative act of transforming gatherers into farmers. The change in the homeland was not so significant territorially, but huge in terms of changes in the very nature of the environment. People left their old pastures and stepped into the swamps of their new homeland. When the pastures of the Nile valley became the Libyan desert, and the pastures of the Tigris and Euphrates valleys the deserts of Rub al-Khali and Dashti Lut, the heroic pioneers, inspired by courage or despair, moved to these ruined places and by their dynamic act turned them into the fertile lands of Egypt and Shinar. Perhaps their neighbors watched the bold enterprise with little hope of success, for in a previous era, when these lands had not yet turned into the inhospitable Afro-Asian steppe, they were for them an earthly paradise. Toynbee notes that the word " paradise", or " paradise", should be understood in the literal sense of the corresponding Greek word. It is a transliteration of a Persian word denoting a savannah area specifically designated for hunting and surrounded by a border. These lands belonged to the ruling minority and were artificially preserved in a virgin state. In ancient times these were grounds for primitive hunting.

The success exceeded the most optimistic hopes of the pioneers. Nature was conquered by human labor. The swamps were drained, dammed and turned into fields. Egyptian and Sumerian civilizations appeared. Their genesis is the result of similar responses to the challenges of the natural environment. The material culture of these two civilizations, according to the English scientist, is of the same type. Spiritual characteristics - religion, art and even social life - show less similarity. The trials that the founders of the Sumerian civilization went through have preserved Sumerian legends. The slaying of the dragon Tiamat by the god Marduk and the creation of the world from his remains is an allegorical reimagining of the conquest of the primeval desert and the creation of the land of Shinar. The story of the flood symbolizes the rebellion of Nature, rebelling against human intervention. Monuments of Sumerian civilization keep silent but accurate evidence of those dynamic acts that, if we turn to Sumerian mythology, were performed by the god Marduk, who killed Tiamat, and the hero Ut-Napishtim, who built the ark in anticipation of the flood and was saved in it during the great flood.

Overcoming Eurocentrism forced Toynbee, in different periods of his work, to turn to the problem of the origins of Western civilization, which he, following scientific traditions, found in antiquity. The English scientist uses the term “Greco-Roman civilization” and the term “Greek civilization”, drawing specific distinctions between them. He put forward the concept of Greek civilization as a radiation from Greece that was a four-dimensional radiation in space-time. Examples include facts from art history and the financial system. There is a simple case of degeneracy in coin series. Here the art of coinage becomes poorer, gradually deteriorating as it moves away in space and time from Greece in the 4th century. BC. The other “curve,” directed not to Gaul and Britain, but to China and Japan, has a similar beginning. But as the Greek art of the "Hellenistic" and early "Imperial" periods spreads eastward through the lost Persian Empire, reaching Afghanistan, it becomes increasingly conventional, serial and lifeless, then something like a miracle occurs. In Afghanistan, this degenerate art collides with another spiritual force, emitted from India - Mahayanist Buddhism. “Degenerate,” as the historian puts it, Greek art, united with Mahayana art, gives birth to a completely new and highly creative civilization - the civilization Hayanist Buddhism, which spread to the northeast across Asia, eventually becoming the civilization of the Far East. Here, the scientist emphasizes, we are faced with one amazing property these spiritual waves . Although their natural tendency is to weaken as they propagate, this tendency can be neutralized and overcome if two waves emitted from different centers collide and merge. The fusion of Greek and Indian waves contributed to the birth of the Buddhist civilization of the Far East. The same Greek wave merged with the Syrian one, and this union gave birth to the Christian civilization of the Western world.

A. Toynbee emphasizes that in history there are challenges that many civilizations face. Greco-Roman history is of interest precisely because Greek civilization broke down in the 5th century. BC e., unable to find a worthy Reply to the same one Call, which faces Western civilization today. During the 6th century. BC e. Greek colonial expansion virtually ceases, partly due to the successful resistance of the victims of expansion, partly due to the political consolidation of Greece's rivals for colonization, the western Mediterranean from the Levant: the Carthaginian and Etruscan powers in the west and the Lydian kingdom, which was replaced by the more powerful Persian Empire in the East. The scientist notes that in that period, which is considered the most outstanding century of Greek civilization, at the end VI century and the beginning V century BC, the Greeks themselves felt surrounded and constrained on all sides. He refers to Thucydides, who wrote that since the time of Cyrus and Darius, Hellas was pressed on all sides for a long time, as a result of which during this period it did not achieve any outstanding achievements; moreover, life in the city-states comes to a standstill. At the same time, during this period, starting from the 6th century BC, Greece successfully solved the new economic problem that confronted it as a result of the cessation of geographic expansion. Greece solved the economic problem through a successful transition from a purely extensive to a more and more intensive economic system. This was a transition from a mixed farm intended for local consumption to a specialized farm oriented for export. The revolution in agriculture caused a general revolution in the economic life of society, since a new, specialized economy required the development of trade and production. However, the solution to the economic problem, in turn, gave rise to a political problem that Greek civilization could not cope with. It was political failure that caused the collapse of the country. As long as the economy of each city-state was closed to limited, local consumption, these policies could afford to remain closed politically. The local sovereignty of each polis could and did cause constant small wars. However, in these economic conditions, wars did not bring with them social catastrophes. The new economic system, born of an ethnic economic revolution influenced by the end of Greek colonial expansion, was based on local production for international exchange. It could operate successfully only if the policies abandoned their economic parochialism and became interdependent. And the system of international economic interdependence could function only in conditions of international political interdependence, conditioned by a certain international system of political legislation and order that would limit the anarchic parochial sovereignty of individual policies.

Such an international political order was presented ready-made to the Greek city-states VI and 5th centuries BC Lydian, Persian and Carthaginian powers. The Persian Empire systematically imposed orderly political relations on the Greek city-states it conquered. Xerxes tried to complete this process by conquering the remnants of independent regions of the Greek world. These still unconquered Greek city-states successfully resisted Xerxes, since the Greeks rightly believed that Persian rule would destroy their culture and civilization. They not only retained their independence, but also liberated the previously conquered policies of the Asian continent. However, having rejected the Persian way of solving the Greek political problem, the victorious Greeks were faced with the task of finding another solution. Here they failed. Having defeated Xerxes in 480-479, they were defeated " from myself "between 428-431 BC. The Greek attempt to establish an international political order was the Delian League, founded in 470. BC. Athens and its allies under Athenian leadership. Delian the alliance was modeled on the Persian model, but failed to achieve its goal. The previous political anarchy in relations between the sovereign, independent Greek city-states flared up under new economic conditions, which made this anarchy not only detrimental, but also fatal for civilization.

The period of the collapse of the Greco-Roman civilization as a result of the inability to replace international anarchy with international law and order constitutes, according to the English scientist, the history of four centuries - from 431 to 31 BC. e. It should be remembered that during this era the Hellenistic culture took shape, developed and fell into decay, holding together civilizational processes and the spiritual and ideological foundations that determine them.

After four centuries of adversity and experimentation, a period of partial temporary prosperity began, largely due, in our opinion, to the peculiar development and differentiation of religion and culture. This was the era of the reign of the deified Augustus, characterized, in addition to the establishment of the cult of the emperor, by the diversity of religions, worldviews and cultures, which determined their creative evolution and ideological richness, without which the emergence of Christianity in later times would have been impossible. The Roman Empire, which Toynbee views as an international league of Greek and other culturally related poleis, he considers it possible to characterize as a belated solution to a problem that the Delian League could not cope with. But the English thinker considers the epitaph of the Roman Empire to be the statement “ too late " He emphasizes that Greco-Roman society felt a kind of repentance only after inflicting mortal wounds on itself with its own hands. The Roman world was not a creative world, and therefore already unstable. It was peace and order four centuries too late .

A. Toynbee states that in the last century of the pre-Christian era, the Greco-Roman world was rocked by wars and revolutions, unrest and violence. This era was similar to modern times. But in the middle of the 2nd century. peace reigned. The space from India to Britain, in which the Greco-Roman civilization established itself through wars, was divided into three states that coexisted relatively peacefully, without major wars. The entire Greco-Roman world was divided between the Roman Empire - around the Mediterranean; the Parthian Empire - in Iran and Iraq; and the Kushan Empire - in Central Asia, Afghanistan and Hindustan. The creators and rulers of these empires were not of Greek origin, but they, although not to the same extent, considered it their duty and honor, i.e. for moral reasons, to maintain Greek culture and preserve the provinces where the Greek way of life was still alive.

During this era, the Greeks and Hellenized or semi-Hellenized eastern peoples and barbarians, more or less influenced by ancient and Hellenistic culture, could coexist under the cover of the Roman-Parthian-Kushan world. The memory of wars and revolutions has faded. Significant changes have occurred in culture, at least in that segment of it that modern cultural scientists call “ social memory" There have also been changes in the elites as guardians of social memory. Counter-elites and countercultures were formed.

Toynbee's works attempt to define the cultural contradiction of the era. Social life has stabilized thanks to the constructive measures of civilized states and rulers. Life has become safer and more sustainable, but, according to the English thinker, it is precisely for this reason that more “ dim “not only politically, but also spiritually. " Like humane anesthesiologists, the Caesars and Arshaks nevertheless pulled the sting out of those once burning economic and political problems, which in that already half-forgotten past were both the core and destruction of human life. The magnanimous action of skillful authoritarian rule involuntarily created a spiritual vacuum in the souls of people» .

Naturally, the problem of filling this spiritual vacuum arose in society, and this question was the main one in the life of the Greco-Roman world of the 2nd century. But enlightened statesmen and philosophers did not yet realize the importance and relevance of the issue. The first to decipher sign of the times and took action in the spirit of the demands of the era, there were humble missionaries of several Oriental religions. In the protracted clash between the world and the Greco-Roman civilization, these preachers of unfamiliar religions gently and carefully seized the initiative from the Greeks and Romans, doing it almost unnoticed. In the forceful confrontation of the Greeks and Romans with the world, the tide had already been reversed. The Greco-Roman offensive lost its power. Resistance was taking shape, although this was not yet realized, since it began in another sphere. The Greco-Roman offensive took place in the military field, and the counter-offensive began in the religious field. A. Toynbee identifies three factors for the success of this new movement in the world.

One of the factors that contributed to the emergence and spread of new religions in the second century was the fatigue and apathy caused by the clash of cultures . Eastern peoples responded to the transmission of Greek culture with two opposite reactions. There were statesmen of the school of Herod the Great who believed that the best way to adapt to the Greco-Roman cultural climate was acclimatization, and there were fanatics who believed that one should, on the contrary, not notice climate change and behave as if nothing had changed around . After exhaustive trials of both strategies, fanaticism discredited itself as a destructive force, and Herod's policies turned into a feeling of dissatisfaction, thereby also discrediting itself. Any of the alternative methods of conducting " culture war " led to a dead end. As the English thinker put it, the moral is that no culture is capable of fulfilling its arrogant claim to become " spiritual talisman " Minds and hearts, disillusioned and disillusioned, were opening to a new message that promised to lift them above these fruitless claims and counterclaims. Under these conditions, the possibility arises of the emergence of a new society, where there will be neither Scythian, nor Greek, nor Jew, nor slave, nor free, neither male nor female, for all people are one in Christ Jesus, or Mithras and Cybele, or maybe be, in one of the bodhisattvas, Amitaba or Avalokiteshvara . According to Toynbee, the first secret of the success of the new religions is the ideal of human brotherhood they propose, and the second is that these new societies are open to all people without distinction of culture, class or gender, and also that they lead to a saving union with a superhuman being , for the lesson that a person without the grace of God cannot succeed as an individual is already embedded in the souls of a generation that witnessed tragic social changes, a generation that, by the irony of historical destinies, was followed by the universal world.

In the gods embodied in new religions, people, as the English thinker noted, finally saw higher beings to whom they could completely devote their heart, soul and all their vitality.

« Mithra will guide you like a reliable captain. Isis will warm you like a tender mother. Christ renounced his divine power and glory to become incarnate in human form and suffer death on the Cross for the sake of us humans. In the same way, for the sake of people, the Bodhisattva, who had already achieved Nirvana, refused to take the last step into bliss. This heroic pioneer deliberately doomed himself to the restless and sorrowful work of earthly existence, making this ultimate sacrifice for the sake of love for his neighbor, whose path to salvation only he could guide, selflessly remaining feeling and suffering here on Earth» .

A. Toynbee writes that if we look into the souls of the Greeks and Romans of the generation of Marcus Aurelius, we will find there the same spiritual vacuum, for these conquerors of the world, like their Western counterparts today, “ doubles ", have long since lost the religion of their ancestors. The way of life that they chose for themselves and began to offer to all barbarians and oriental peoples who in one way or another fell under the influence of Greek culture, was a secular way of life, where the intellect is called upon to serve the soul, developing philosophies that should take the place of religion. These philosophies were supposed to give scope to the mind and thereby tie the soul to the initial cycle of nature. Disillusioned with traditional culture, the Greek and Roman minorities actually experienced the same spiritual hunger that most of modern humanity experiences.. However, the thinker notes, those new religions that appealed to everyone without distinction of gender, age and status would come into conflict with common philosophical worldviews if they did not take traditional intellectual forms. All of them, from Buddhism to Christianity, were externally presented as “ greek art style”, and Christianity went even further, taking on the guise of intellectual Greek philosophy. It is impossible to predict the future, but some of what has already happened in history opens up at least one possibility for the development of society.

Modern researchers point out that many of the English scientist’s predictions, primarily those related to the relationship between the West and Russia, have come true. The predictive capabilities of this theory were inspired by productive attempts at an integrative approach to the content of the historical process. The development of cultural approaches in sociological theory made it possible to determine development trends civilizational processes, consequences of interaction sociocultural systems Historical and social cultural studies, which received conceptual expression within the framework of sociology, contributed to the comprehension of the unity and diversity of not only the historical, but also the cultural process; the classification of civilizations, which is based on religious worldviews, is relative and inconsistent, like certain world religions, but it can serve model, " ideal type» research of sociocultural realities. In this classification, as well as in determining the content of religious systems, an attempt to substantiate the unity of the cultural formation of man and society in specific historical conditions and circumstances seems valuable, “ cultural eras».

Rice. 2.“Professor of history Arnold Toynbee spoke at the Ritov lectures in 1952. He explored the history of hostility between East and West, and looked at how people in non-Western countries at the time saw the Western world. His second lecture explored the potential impact Westernization to Muslim countries. (BBC)"

In cultural studies civilizational approach to the historical process, its specific sociocultural content has not exhausted itself. In the methodological aspect, this approach, productive for historical and social cultural studies, can be combined with formational approach. For a cultural scientist who studies the relationships between categories “ culture" And " civilization", a socio-economic formation in a methodological sense should represent the unity of the basis or economic structure of society and the superstructure, including diverse, including religious ideas and ideologies, which are considered as an expression of specific sociocultural circumstances . It is necessary to remember the instructions of G.V. Plekhanov, that the basis is established in history through the superstructure, i.e., religious ideas, ideologies and institutions. This is the specificity of the dialectics of cultural progress, realized as a trend in history, in the conditions multidimensional interaction, including struggle, differentiation, and integration, of many cultures and civilizations existing and developing in a specific time and space, economic, geopolitical, socio-political and religious boundaries that do not coincide in the history of nations, peoples and state associations.

You can help the development of our project by clicking the “Donate” button in the upper right corner of the main page of the site or transfer funds from any terminal to our account if you wish - Yandex Money – 410011416569382

©Arushanov Viktor Zarmailovich, Ph.D., Associate Professor, 2011

©Editing and design, Arushanov Sergey Zarmailovich 2011

Arnold Joseph Toynbee (1889-1975) - English historian and sociologist. His 12-volume study entitled “Comprehension of History” brought him worldwide fame, in which he outlined his views on the history and culture of mankind. A. Toynbee is confident that social development is of a natural historical nature, but history itself is the work of the Creator, and Divine Providence operates in the “historical drama.”

According to A. Toynbee, humanity as a natural phenomenon appears as a collection of individual local civilizations, and the historical process is the cycle of such formations. Civilizations are likened to biological species living within a certain space and at a certain time. Each civilization is tied to geographical conditions (has its own “area” of distribution), which play a significant role in creating its originality. Just like any biological organism, the historical existence of civilizations goes through several phases: the energy of the “vital impulse” stimulates emergence and growth, but when “vital forces are depleted,” breakdown, decline and decay occur. However, not all nations go through the cycle completely from beginning to end. A. Toynbee is sure that each civilization follows its own, unique path: some die before they reach their apogee, others, having arisen, stop developing, freezing in a monotonous repetition of the same thing, and others, at the climax, instantly collapse.

A. Toynbee numbered 21 such local civilizations in the history of mankind. At the end of A. Toynbee’s study, the total number is reduced to 13, while increasing the number of those preserved to 7 (8): Egyptian, Sumerian, Minoan, Chinese, Indus, Hittite, Syrian, Hellenic, Babylonian, Mayan, Andean, Far Eastern (main) and Far Eastern (Korea and Japan), Western, Orthodox Christian (main) and Orthodox Christian (in Russia), Hindu, Yucatan, Mexican, Iranian and Arab. To this day, only five main civilizations have survived - Chinese, Indian, Islamic, Russian and Western.

The law of “Challenge-and-Response” plays a huge role in the “historical drama”. The birth and progress of civilization is determined by these categories. The essence of the law is as follows. Any public education constantly faces a “challenge”: a situation arises when external circumstances begin to threaten the existence of a culture. Therefore, the “challenge” will take a different form each time. This can be either unfavorable natural changes (soil drying, earthquakes and hurricanes), or the hostility of other peoples (the offensive of barbarian tribes, etc.). “Challenges” from the environment are necessary: ​​they stimulate creative development and awaken vital activity. Societies that have been in favorable conditions for a long time remain in vegetation, progress in them is slowed down.

The “Challenge” must be answered. The entire history of mankind is a series of “Challenges” and “Responses”. “Answer” is a reaction to a specific historical request. It must be adequate to the situation and positively resolve the problems that time poses to culture. “Answer” options: transition to a new economic model, change of place of residence, creation of irrigation systems, creation of a new religion, development of technology, etc. If the “Challenge” does not receive an “Answer” or it is inadequate to the situation, then the “Challenge” is repeated again and again . The inability of civilization to find the “Answer” and offer a positive solution due to the loss of creative energy gives rise to social deformations that ultimately lead to a “breakdown”, and then to decline and disappearance.

Arnold Joseph Toynbee(English Arnold Joseph Toynbee; April 14, 1889, London - October 22, 1975) - British historian, philosopher of history, cultural scientist and sociologist, professor who researched international history at the London School of Economics and the University of London. He is also the author of numerous books. Researcher of globalization processes, critic of the concept of Eurocentrism. In 1943, the head of the research department of the Foreign Office in London, which dealt with issues of the post-war world order. Member of the American Philosophical Society (1941).

His 12-volume work “Comprehension of History” brought him the greatest fame. Author of many works, articles, speeches and presentations, as well as 67 books translated into many languages ​​of the world.

Encyclopedic YouTube

1 / 2

✪ Philosophy of society by Spengler and Toynbee. Civilization theory. Lectures on philosophy

✪ Hogg Charles. On the threshold of a new civilization: a future without fear

Subtitles

Biography

Arnold Joseph Toynbee was born in London on April 14, 1889. He was the son of Harry Walpy Toynbee (1861-1941), secretary of a public charity, and his wife Sarah Eddie Marshall (1859-1939). His sister Jacqueline Toynbee was an archaeologist and art historian. Arnold Toynbee was the grandson of Joseph Toynbee, nephew of the famous economist Arnold Toynbee ru en (1852-1883). Arnold Joseph Toynbee was a descendant of famous British intellectuals for several generations.

On October 22, 1975, at the age of 86, Arnold Joseph Toynbee died. Asteroid 7401 Toynbee is named in honor of the historian.

Scientific and cultural heritage

Michael Lang said that for most of the 20th century, “Toynbee was perhaps the most read, translated and discussed scientist of our time. His contribution was enormous - hundreds of books, pamphlets and articles. Many of them have been translated into 30 different languages... the critical reaction to Toynbey's work is a whole scholarly history of the mid-century: we find a long list of the most important periods in history, Beard, Braudel, Collingwood and so on." In his most famous work, The Comprehension of History, published between 1934 and 1961, Toynbee “... examined the rise and fall of 26 civilizations in the course of human history, and concluded that they flourished because societies successfully responded to challenges under the leadership of wise minorities made up of elite leaders.”

"Making History" is both a commercial and a scientific phenomenon. In the USA alone, more than seven thousand sets of the ten-volume edition were sold by 1955. Most people, including scientists, initially relied only on the abridged edition of the first six chapters prepared by British historian David Churchill Samerwell and published in 1947. 300,000 copies of this abbreviation were sold in the United States. Numerous publications were full of articles on the topic of Toynbee’s popular work, and lectures and seminars were held everywhere on the topic of the book “Comprehension of History.” Arnold Toynbee sometimes personally took part in such discussions. That same year he even appeared on the cover of Time magazine. The headline read: “The most daring historical theory written in England since Karl Marx’s Capital.” Toynbee was also a regular columnist on the BBC (he spoke, taking into account how non-Western civilizations look at the Western world, examined the history and causes of modern enmity between East and West.

Canadian economic historian Harold Adams Innis was a prominent example of proponents of Toynbee's theory among Canadian researchers. Following Toynbee and others (Spengler, Sorokin, Kroeber and Cochrane), Innis examined the rise of civilizations from the perspective of imperial government and mass communications. Toynbee's civilization theory was adopted by many scientists, such as Ernst Robert Curtius, as a variant paradigm in the post-war space. Curtius was a follower of Toynbee and believed that the author of the Comprehension of History had created a huge basis for a new study of Latin literature. “Do both cultures and historical objects that are cultural information sources emerge, flourish and decay? Only comparative morphology with special approaches can perhaps answer these questions. It was Arnold Joseph Toynbee who posed this question to the world."

Already in the 1960s, Toynbee's theory was losing its popularity in science and the media, but many historians continue to refer to the Comprehension of History right up to the present day.

Toynbee's theory of local civilizations

Toynbee viewed world history as a system of conventionally distinguished civilizations, going through the same phases from birth to death and making up the branches of the “single tree of history.” Civilization, according to Toynbee, is a closed society, characterized by two main criteria: religion and the form of its organization; territorial characteristic, the degree of remoteness from the place where a given society originally arose.

Toynbee identifies 21 civilizations:

The theory of the development of civilizations is based on the idea of ​​the emergence and development of civilizations in the form answer to global challenges of its time. The mechanism of the birth and development of civilization is associated with answer on challenges, which the natural and social environment constantly throws at people (harsh climate, frequent earthquakes or floods, wars, cultural expansion, etc.). The creative minority must successfully respond to the challenge by solving the problem. Toynbee identifies 21 civilizations, of which only 10 civilizations remained in existence in the 20th century, and 8 of them are under threat of assimilation into Western culture. Despite the uniqueness of each civilization, there is a single logic of their development - the progress of spirituality and religion.

Scientists have put forward criteria for assessing civilizations: stability in time and space, in situations of Challenge and interaction with other peoples. He saw the meaning of civilization in the fact that comparable units (monads) of history go through similar stages of development. Successfully developing civilizations go through stages of emergence, growth, breakdown and decay. The development of civilization is determined by whether the creative minority of civilization is able to find answers to the challenges of the natural world and the human environment. Toynbee notes the following types of challenges: the challenge of a harsh climate (Egyptian, Sumerian, Chinese, Mayan, Andean civilizations), the challenge of new lands (Minoan civilization), the challenge of sudden attacks from neighboring societies (Hellenic civilization), the challenge of constant external pressure (Russian Orthodox, Western civilization) and the challenge of infringement, when society, having lost something vital, directs its energy to develop properties that compensate for the loss. Each civilization gives a response, formulated by its “creative minority,” to the challenge posed to it by nature, social contradictions, and especially other civilizations. At the stages of emergence and growth, the creative minority finds an answer to the challenges of the environment, its authority grows and civilization grows. At the stages of breakdown and decay, the creative minority loses the ability to find answers to the challenges of the environment and turns into an elite, standing above society and no longer governing by the power of authority, but by the power of weapons. The majority of the civilization's population turns into an internal proletariat. The ruling elite creates a universal state, the internal proletariat - the Ecumenical Church, the external proletariat creates mobile military units.

At the center of Toynbee's historiosophical constructions is the concept of Hellenic civilization. The scientist fundamentally rejected the category of socio-economic formation.

Toynbee about Russia

Toynbee considers continuous external pressure to be the main challenge that determined the development of Russian Orthodox civilization. It first began on the part of nomadic peoples in 1237 with the campaign of Batu Khan. The answer was a change in lifestyle and a renewal of social organization. This allowed, for the first time in the history of civilizations, a sedentary society not only to defeat the Eurasian nomads, but also to conquer their lands, change the face of the landscape, and ultimately change the landscape, transforming nomadic pastures into peasant fields, and camps into settled villages. The next time terrible pressure on Russia followed in the 17th century from the Western world. The Polish army occupied Moscow for two years. The answer this time was the founding of St. Petersburg by Peter the Great and the creation of the Russian fleet on the Baltic Sea.

Criticism of Toynbee

The theoretical constructions of A. Toynbee caused a mixed reaction among professional historians and philosophers.

The universalist vision of cultural and historical development proposed by him is based on the idea of ​​the unity of the human race, capable of enriching the experience of a tradition that transmits universal humanistic values. The constructions of the British theorist summarize the richest empirical material and contain generalizations that encourage serious reflection. Of particular interest is his view on the fate of the history of the 20th century, marked by the unity of the entire planetary community, seeking an answer to the challenge of global problems of our time. Toynbee's legacy is interesting in terms of the embodiment of general humanistic values ​​in the development of a strategy of new thinking aimed at analyzing the complex collisions of the nuclear age. It calls for reflection on the relationship between the past and the present, the unity and diversity of the cultural and historical process, the progress and diversity of the paths of human development, and the prospects for its future.

The famous French historian, one of the founders of the “Annals” school, Lucien Febvre, left the following comments:

Comparative history through the eyes of Toynbee... What is this if not the resurrection in the 20th century of an old literary genre that was popular in its time and produced so many masterpieces? From Lucretius to Fontenelle, this genre was called “Dialogues of the Dead.” Let's sum it up in a nutshell. What is worthy of praise in A Study of History is nothing particularly new to us. And what is new in it is not of particular value... We were not presented with any new key. There is no master key with which we could open twenty-one doors leading to twenty-one civilizations. But we never sought to take possession of such a miraculous master key. We are devoid of pride, but we have faith. For the time being, let history remain Cinderella, sitting on the edge of the table in the company of other humanities disciplines. We know very well why she got this place. We are also aware that it was also affected by a deep and general crisis of scientific ideas and concepts caused by the sudden flourishing of some sciences, in particular physics... And there is nothing terrible in this, nothing that could force us to renounce our painstaking and difficult work and rush into the arms of charlatans, naive and at the same time crafty miracle workers, writers of cheap (but twenty-volume) opuses on the philosophy of history

see also

Bibliography

Works translated into Russian:

• Toynbee A.J. Comprehension of history: Collection / Trans. from English E. D. Zharkova. - M.: Rolf, 2001-640 pp., ISBN 5-7836-0413-5, ref. 5000 copies
• Toynbee A.J. Civilization before the court of history: Collection / Trans. from English - M.: Rolf, 2002-592 pp., ISBN 5-7836-0465-8, ref. 5000 copies
• Toynbee A.J. Experienced. My meetings. / Per. from English - M.: Iris-press, 2003-672 pp., ISBN 5-8112-0076-5, ref. 5000 copies
• Toynbee A.J. Research of history: In 3 volumes / Transl. from English, intro. article and comments by K. Ya. Kozhurin. - St. Petersburg: St. Petersburg University Publishing House: “Oleg Abyshko Publishing House”, 2006-1333 pp., ISBN 5-288-03610-1, ref. 1000 copies
• Toynbee A. J., Ikeda D. Choose life. Dialogue between Arnold J. Toynbee and Daisaku Ikeda - M.: Publishing house Mosk. University, 2007-448 p. - ISBN 978-5-211-05343-4
• Toynbee A.J. The role of personality in history. / Per. from English - M.: Astrel, 2012-222 p. - ISBN 978-5-271-41624-8
• Toynbee A. J., Huntington S. F. Challenges and responses. How civilizations perish - M.: Algorithm, 2016-288 p. - ISBN 978-5-906817-86-0

Rest

1. “Atrocities in Armenia: The Murder of a Nation” (The Armenian Atrocities: The Murder of a Nation, 1915).
2. “Nationality and the War” (1915).
3. “The New Europe: Some Essays in Reconstruction” (1915).
4. “The Balkans: A History of Bulgaria, Serbia, Romania and Turkey” (A History of Bulgaria, Serbia, Greece, Rumania, Turkey, 1915).
5. "Deportations in Belgium" (The Belgian Deportations, 1917).
6. “German Terror in Belgium” (The German Terror in Belgium: An Historical Record, 1917).
7. “The German Terror in France: An Historical Record,” 1917.
8. “Turkey: A Past and a Future” (1917).
9. “The Western Question in Greece and Turkey: A Study in the Contact of Civilizations” (1922).
10. “Greek Civilization and Character: The Self-Revelation of Ancient Greek Society” (1924).
11. “Greek Historical Thought from Homer to the Age of Heraclius” (1924).
12. “Non-Arab Territories of the Ottoman Empire since the Armistice of the 30th October 1918, 1924.”
13. "Turkey" (Turkey, co-author, 1926).
14. “An Introduction to the Foreign Policy of the British Empire in the Post-War Period” (The Conduct of British Empire Foreign Relations since the Peace Settlement, 1928).
15. A Journey to China, or Things That Are Seen, 1931
16. "Comprehension of History" (Abridged version by D. S. Somervell, 1946, 1957, final abridged version 10 volumes 1960).
17. “Civilization on Trial” (1948).
18. “The Prospects of Western Civilization” (1949).
19. "War and Civilization" (War and Civilization, 1950).
20. “Twelve Men of Action in Greco-Roman History” (according to Thucydides, Xenophon, Plutarch and Polybius) (Twelve Men of Action in Greco-Roman History, 1952).
21. “The World and the West” (1953).
22. “An Historical Study of Religion” (An Historian’s Approach to Religion, 1956).
23. “Christianity among the Religions of the World” (1957).
24. "Democracy in the Atomic Age" (1957).
25. "From East to West: A Journey around the World" (East to West: A Journey round the World, 1958).
26. Hellenism: The History of a Civilization, 1959.
27. “Between Oxus and Jumna” (1961).
28. “America and the World Revolution” (1962).
29. “The Present-Day Experiment in Western Civilization” (1962).
30. “Between Niger and Nile” (1965).
31. “Hannibal’s Legacy: The Hannibalic War’s Effects on Roman Life” (1965): T. I. “Rome and Her Neighbors before Hannibal’s Entry.” T. II. Rome and Her Neighbors after Hannibal’s Exit.
32. Change and Habit: The Challenge of Our Time, 19660.
33. "My Meetings" (Acquaintances, 1967).
34. "Cities and Destiny" (Cities of Destiny, 1967).
35. "Between Maule and Amazon" (Between Maule and Amazon, 1967).
36. The Crucible of Christianity: Judaism, Hellenism and the Historical Background to the Experiences, 1969.
37. "Christian Faith" (1969).
38. “Some Problems of Greek History” (1969).
39. "Cities in Development" (Cities on the Move, 1970).
40. “Saving the Future” (dialogue between A. Toynbee and Prof. Kei Wakaizumi, 1971).
41. “Comprehension of History” (Illustrated one-volume book co-authored with Jane Kaplan)
42. Half the World: The History and Culture of China and Japan, 1973.
43. Constantine Porphyrogenitus and His World, 1973
44. Mankind and Mother Earth: A Narrative History of the World, 1976, posthumously.
45. “The Greeks and Their Heritages” (1981, posthumously).

Notes

1. ID BNF: Open Data Platform - 2011.
2. Committee of Historical and Scientific Works - 1834.
3. SNAC - 2010.
4. Orry, Louise. Arnold Toynbee, Brief Lives. - Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997. - P. 537. - ISBN 0198600879.

Arnold Joseph Toynbee - English historian, born in London on April 14, 1889. Educated at Winchester College and Balliol College, Oxford University. In 1913 he married Rosalind Murray, daughter of Gilbert Murray, an Oxford classics professor. Their son Philip became a famous novelist. They divorced in 1946, and that same year Toynbee married his longtime assistant Veronica Marjorie Boulter. In 1919–1924 he was professor of Byzantine studies, Greek language, literature and history at the University of London, from 1925 until his retirement in 1955 - scientific director of the Royal Institute of International Affairs and research fellow at the University of London. From 1920 to 1946 he was editor of the Review of International Relations. During World War II, Toynbee was director of the scientific department of the British Foreign Office. In 1956 he became a Knight of the Order of the Knights of Honor. Toynbee died in York on October 22, 1975.

Of interest to cultural studies is Toynbee’s 12-volume study, “Comprehension of History,” in which he gives a classification of local civilizations and outlines his views on sociocultural dynamics. Toynbee identifies the main stages of the life cycle of civilization: emergence, development, decline, decomposition and death. Each civilization is tied to its own area. Today there are five of them: Chinese, Indian, Islamic, Western, Russian. Toynbee cited moral degeneration and the loss of the elite minority's creative approach to emerging problems as the reasons for the decline of civilizations. Toynbee proposed the concept of "challenge and response", according to which dynamic changes in culture are determined by external factors. In his opinion, in the future it is possible to merge all civilizations into one on the basis of the Universal Church. Main works and publications: “The Western Question in Greece and Turkey” (1922), “Greek Historical Thought” (1924), “Comprehension of History” (1934-1961), “The Historian’s Approach to Religion” (1956), “America and the World revolution" (1962); "Between the Niger and the Nile" (1965); "Changing Cities" (1970), "Constantine Porphyrogenitus and His Age" (1973).

Of course, A. Toynbee was not the first to attempt to connect European and non-European history into a single whole. Suffice it to recall the names of H. Wells or O. Spengler, and if the former still viewed this connection in a Eurocentric spirit, the latter clearly adhered to the thesis of the equality and even superiority of non-Western cultures. Then why, when understanding this issue, is it urgent to turn to the Toynbean heritage?
The point is not only that Toynbean's studies were broader and more comprehensive than Spengler's. No one before Toynbee raised with such force the question that in the conditions of diversity of cultures and forms of human experience, mutual understanding of people without losing their identity and even, on the contrary, through its deepening and meaningful enrichment becomes one of the most important imperatives of our time. No one before him realized with such clarity that the process of cultural interaction between peoples, unprecedented in its intensity, is one of those fundamental challenges or, in the words of E. Rashkovsky, “ciphergrams of being”, to which humanity is forced to respond in each generation, learning in private temporary collisions their eternal dimensions. /Pergamon: literature through the eyes of readers/
Bibliography
Published in Russian
Toynbee A. J. Understanding History 1991; 2002; 2006; 2008; 2010
Toynbee A. J. Study of History 2010
Toynbee A. J. A Study of History. In three volumes volume 1; volume 2; Volume 3, 2006
Toynbee A. J. Civilization before the court of history 2003; 2006
Toynbee A. J. Experience. My meetings, 2003
Choose life. Dialogue between Arnold Toynbee and Daisaku Ikeda, 2008

“I have always wanted to see the far side of the Moon,” - so briefly and succinctly, at the end of his days, the world famous English historian, diplomat, public figure, sociologist and philosopher Arnold Joseph Toynbee, who had been keenly interested in the history of peoples since childhood, formulated his credo. those who did not fit into the traditional Eurocentric scheme - Persians, Carthaginians, Muslims, Chinese, Japanese, etc. He remained faithful to this interest in his mature years. Indeed, Toynbee, as a historian, spent his entire life fighting against narrow-minded Eurocentrism, insisting on the uniqueness of the appearance of each civilization, and as a public figure and publicist, against any attempts by the West to impose its own system of values ​​and assessments on other peoples and civilizations as a the truth in the ultimate instance. The importance of Toynbee cannot be overestimated. There are few names in history comparable to him in terms of breadth of coverage and erudition, and the depth of insight into the essence of the problems posed. His truly grandiose work, despite the ill will of critics and objectively existing errors, has already firmly entered the golden fund of world philosophical and historical thought. Without exaggeration, we can say that more than a quarter of a century after Toynbee’s death, his ideas, breaking generally accepted stereotypes, continue to have a significant influence on social philosophy and public consciousness of both Western and other civilizations.

Arnold Joseph Toynbee was born on April 14, Palm Sunday, 1889 in London. His pedigree is remarkable in its own way. He was named after two of his close relatives: his grandfather and his eldest uncle. The grandfather of the future historian Joseph Toynbee (1815-1866) was a famous otorhinolaryngologist and successfully cured Queen Victoria herself of deafness; was closely acquainted with the intellectual elite of his time - among his friends and acquaintances one can name J. S. Mill, J. Ruskin, M. Faraday, B. Jowett, G. Mazzini... However, his life was cut short tragically - he fell victim to a medical experiment, dying from an overdose of chloroform.

Joseph Toynbee left behind three sons, and each of them was unique in its own way. The eldest son of Joseph, in whose honor A. J. Toynbee received his first name, Arnold Toynbee (1852-1883), became a famous English historian, economist and social reformer, his main work “The Industrial Revolution” ( 1884; in the Russian translation of 1898, “The Industrial Revolution in England in the 18th Century”) is a classic. It was Arnold Toynbee Sr. who coined the term “industrial revolution.” Joseph's middle son, Paget Toynbee (1855-1932), took up philology, becoming one of the leading experts on Dante's work. The third son, Harry Volpi Toynbee (1861-1941), found his calling in social activities, working for the Society for the Organization of Charities. He was the father of A. J. Toynbee.

Already from early childhood, Arnold Joseph Toynbee showed extraordinary abilities in literature and was distinguished by an exceptional memory. The main influence (until his marriage in 1913) was his mother, Sarah Edith Toynbee, née Marshall (1859-1939), an unusually intelligent woman and extremely strong in her Anglican faith, British patriotism, sense of duty and affection for his son. It is impossible not to mention here about his great-uncle (Joseph’s younger brother) - Harry Toynbee (1819-1909), in whose house the future historian was born and raised. “Uncle Harry” was a retired sea captain, one of the pioneers of meteorology, who in his old age began writing theological treatises. He encouraged his cousin's precocious learning and cultivated his talent for languages ​​- for example, he gave the boy a few pence for memorizing passages from the Bible, so that in his mature years A. J. Toynbee could quote verbatim from memory quite large pieces from the Old and New Testaments. However, “Uncle Harry,” being the heir and representative of the Puritan tradition, was a religious fanatic and was very hostile towards representatives of other faiths, primarily Catholics and those Anglicans who gravitated towards Catholicism. Toynbee’s parents adhered to Anglicanism - a kind of “middle way”, and were much more tolerant of other religions than their elderly uncle, which later distinguished Arnold Joseph himself.

At school, Toynbee's preferences became even more clear. Mathematics was difficult for him, but he easily mastered languages, especially classical ones. In 1902, he entered the prestigious Winchester College, after which in 1907 he continued his education at Balliol College, Oxford, which was at the beginning of the 20th century. a privileged launching pad for a promising career as a statesman. College education paved the way to high government positions.

From college, Toynbee acquired an excellent knowledge of Latin and Greek, passing the first public examination for a bachelor's degree in both classical languages ​​in 1909, and in 1911 in the so-called humanities (“litterae humaniores”). After graduating from Balliol College, he remained there to teach ancient Greek and Roman history. For his brilliant successes, Toynbee's scholarship was extended and his intention to travel was encouraged.

In 1911 and 1912 Toynbee traveled a lot, exploring the sights of Greece and Italy, first in the company of British classical philologists, and then alone on foot, carrying only a flask of water, a raincoat, a spare pair of socks and a certain amount of money necessary to buy food from residents of villages along the way. He slept in the open air or on the floors of coffee shops. In total, he walked almost 3,000 miles, mostly following narrow goat paths through the mountains (only sometimes leaving the path - either in order to reach some high point convenient for viewing the surrounding area, or in search of a shorter route to this or that other ancient attractions). To better study the features of a new science for him, Toynbee studied for a year at the British School of Archeology in Athens, and then took part in excavations of newly discovered monuments of the Cretan-Mycenaean culture.

During a trip to Laconia, one incident occurred with Toynbee that turned out to be fateful. This is how many years later he described it himself: “On April 26, 1912, finding myself in Laconia, I planned to walk from Kato Vezani, where I spent the previous night, to Githion... I figured that this trip would One day would be enough for me, because on the piece of pseudo-Austrian headquarters map there was marked a first-class road that ran right through a section of rough terrain; thus, the last leg of this one-day hike promised to be simple and quick. This false piece of paper, which I constantly carried with me at that time, still lies on my table, right before my eyes. Here it is, this supposedly beautiful road, marked by two shameless, daring black lines. When, having crossed the [river] Evrotos on a bridge that was not indicated on the map, I reached the place where the road was supposed to begin, it turned out that there was no road there at all, which means I had to get to Gythion over rough terrain. One gorge followed another; I was already several hours late against my schedule; my flask was half empty, and then, to my joy, I came across a briskly running stream with clear water. Leaning over, I pressed my lips to him and drank, drank, drank. And only when I got drunk, I noticed a man standing nearby at the entrance to his house and watching me. “This is very bad water,” he noted. If this man had a sense of responsibility and if he had been more attentive to his neighbor, he would have told me about this before I started drinking; however, if he had acted as he should have done, that is, he would have warned me, then I, very likely, would not be alive now. He accidentally saved my life, because he turned out to be right: the water was bad. I fell ill with dysentery, and thanks to this illness, which did not let me go over the next five or six years, I turned out to be unfit for military service and was not drafted into the war of 1914-1918.” Many of Toynbee's friends and peers died in the First World War. The experiences associated with their death will haunt him throughout his life. Thus, the fatal incident may have saved Toynbee - he was not drafted into the active army and, continuing to engage in science, was later able to create his main work.

From 1912 to 1924 Toynbee served as Research Professor of International History at the University of London. During the First World War, he worked in the Information Department of the British Foreign Office as a scientific consultant on historical, political and demographic problems of the Middle East. This work undoubtedly left a strong imprint on Toynbee's approach to historical facts. Here he often had to deal with many pieces of evidence that were not included in official documents. At the Paris Peace Conference of 1919 (and subsequently, after the Second World War, at the Paris Conference of 1946), Toynbee was present as a member of the British delegation. From 1919 to 1924 Toynbee is Professor of Byzantine and Modern Greek, History and Culture at the University of London. In 1925, he became scientific director of the British Royal Institute of International Affairs. He held this position until 1955. At the same time, he was the editor and co-author of the Institute's annual Survey of International Affairs (London, 1925-1965).

After retirement, Toynbee traveled extensively to countries in Asia, Africa, America, lectured and taught at the University of Denver, New Mexico State University, Mills College and other institutions. Almost until my death he retained a clear mind and an extraordinary memory. Fourteen months before his death, he was defeated by a strong para-lich. He could hardly move or speak. On October 22, 1975, at the age of 86, Toynbee died in a private hospital in York.

This is the biography of Arnold Joseph Toynbee in brief. As for his “intellectual biography,” here we can identify many different people who influenced the historian at one time or another. We find their names on the pages of his works: first of all, this is Toynbee’s mother, who herself wrote popular adaptations of history, E. Gibbon, E. Freeman, F. J. Taggart, A. E. Zimmern, M. I. Rostovtsev, W. X . Prescott, Sir Lewis Namier, ancient authors - Herodotus, Thucydides, Plato, Lucretius, Polybius. In his mature years, Toynbee was most strongly influenced by the works of A. Bergson, Augustine the Blessed, Ibn Khaldun, Aeschylus, J. V. Goethe, C. G. Jung... The list goes on and on. However, it is always necessary to remember that all these numerous influences were fused by Toynbee into his own, deeply original concept of historical development thanks to his deep knowledge of primary sources and living life.

Peru A. J. Toynbee owns a significant number of works devoted to ancient history, the history of international relations, and the history of modern times. Many of his books became bestsellers almost immediately. Toy-nbi's works were translated into more than 25 languages ​​during the author's lifetime. However, the main work that earned him worldwide fame was the 12-volume work “A Study of History,” published by Oxford University Press in 1934-1961.

While still a very young man, Toynbee drew up a program for what he wanted to accomplish in his works, and he carried out this program to the end, as evidenced by numerous notebooks filled with ideas and references that, years later, were used to implementation of the original plan. “He grew up in an atmosphere of unshakable authority, studying the Bible, history, classical languages. But Bergson's later works shook his calm world with the power of revelation. Bergson brought him for the first time an acute experience of unreliability and changeability, but also faith in the creative power of leading individuals and social strata, raising vegetative life to a higher order.”

This happened on the eve of the First World War, and around the same time, Toynbee suddenly had the idea, caused by the outbreak of the war, that the Western world had entered the same period of life that the Greek world went through during the Peloponnesian War. This instant realization gave Toynbee the idea to draw comparisons between civilizations.

The First World War, as the historian himself later wrote, put an end to liberal-progressive illusions and greatly stimulated his interest in human history taken as a whole. If on the very eve of the war he still did not want to recognize the thesis that cultures are mortal, like people, as valid for Europe, then by the end of the war the picture had changed.

“We, civilizations, we now know that we are mortal. We have heard stories about persons who disappeared without a trace, about empires that sank with all their humanity and technology, sank into the impenetrable depths of centuries, with their deities and laws, with their academicians and sciences, pure and applied, with its grammarians, its dictionaries, its classics, its romantics and symbolists, its critics and critics' critics. We know well that the entire visible earth is formed from ashes and that ashes have significance. Through the thickness of history we discerned the ghosts of huge ships, settled under the weight of wealth and intelligence. We didn't know how to count them. But these crashes, in essence, did not affect us. Elam, Nineveh, Babylon were beautifully vague names, and the complete collapse of their worlds was as insignificant to us as their very existence. But France, England, Russia... These could also be considered wonderful names. Lu-sitania is also a wonderful name. And now we see that the abyss of history is spacious enough for everyone. We feel that civilization is endowed with the same fragility as life. The circumstances that could force the creations of Keats and Baudelaire to share the fate of the creations of Menander are least of all incomprehensible: look at any newspaper.”

These are the words from the article “The Crisis of the Spirit” by the greatest poet of France, Paul Valery, written in 1919 and first published in the London magazine Athenaeum. However, we find similar thoughts among many, many thinkers who went through the experience of the First World War. “Lost generation”, “crisis of spirit”, “decline of Europe” - these are the most well-known characteristics of the post-war period. “The World War of 1914-1918,” notes the American historian McIntyre, “began a series of crises of colossal proportions that lasted for two generations, which brought intellectuals and politicians, public and cultural figures out of a state of well-behaved complacency with civilization. .. [It] showed that the barbarities of war can, thanks to refined technology, be increased to such an extent as to consume all humanity and all cultures.” Toynbee called this period a “time of troubles” that shook the idea of ​​progress and trust in human reason, which underlay both the old liberal and new Marxist views of history. The “Time of Troubles” lasted throughout the 20s and 30s. XX century and prepared the situation for an alternative view of history.

In the XIX - early XX centuries. in Western European consciousness, the “axiological” interpretation of cultures prevailed. She divided various ways of human existence into “cultural” and “uncultured”, “higher” and “lower”. A striking example of such an interpretation is the Eurocentric system of views. In the Russian philosophical tradition, this point of view was criticized more than once already in the 19th century - here one can recall the Slavophiles and the predecessors of the civilizational model of history N. Ya. Danilevsky and K. N. Leontiev. However, in the 20th century. the limitations and inconsistency of the “axiological” interpretation became obvious to many researchers in the West. Many Western cultural researchers, in the process of criticizing traditional Eurocentrism, followed the path of a “non-axiological” interpretation of cultures. Quite logically, they came to the idea of ​​equalizing all historical ways of existence, considering them as equal and equivalent. According to these researchers, it is a mistake to divide cultures into “higher” and “lower”, since they represent historically developed ways of life that are equivalent in their alternativeness. In the domestic critical literature, these concepts are referred to as the concepts of “local” or “equivalent” cultures. Supporters of this point of view include (in addition to the above-mentioned N. Ya. Danilevsky and K. N. Leontiev) such thinkers and scientists as O. Spengler, E. Mayer, P. A. Sorokin, K. G. Dawson, R. . Benedict, F. Northrop, T. S. Eliot, M. Herskowitz and, finally, A. J. Toynbee himself. Their criticism of Eurocentrism was often combined with a cyclical model of the historical process.

The idea of ​​historical cycles has been known for a long time. Even in the ancient world, many philosophers and historians expressed the idea of ​​the cyclical nature of history (for example, Aristotle, Polybius, Syma

Qian). Such views were dictated by the desire to discern a certain order, natural rhythm, regularity, meaning in the chaos of historical events by analogy with natural cycles. Subsequently, similar views were expressed by such thinkers as Ibn Khaldun, Niccolo Machiavelli, Giambattista Vico, Charles Fourier, N. Ya. Danilevsky. However, the dominant history in Western European philosophy during the 18th-19th centuries. the linear progressivist scheme, based on the Eurocentric approach and the cult of progress, continued to remain. Progress became the faith of the average European, a faith that first replaced the traditional Christian religion in Europe and then spread throughout the world. The process of secularization, which began in the Renaissance and reached its apogee in the 18th century, inevitably led to the loss of the connection between culture itself and the spirit of Christianity that had guided it for many centuries. European culture, having lost this connection, began to seek new inspiration for itself in the ideal of progress (or Progress, as the word was often written since the 18th century). Belief in progress, in the limitless possibilities of the human mind, becomes a real religion, more or less disguised behind the façade of philosophy or science. Associated with admiration for “Progress” is the cult of “Civilization” (one unique and absolute European civilization) and its achievements. As C. JI wrote. Frank, characterizing historical schemes based on faith in progress, “if you look closely at the interpretations of history of this kind, it would not be a caricature to say that at their limit their understanding of history almost always comes down to this division: 1) from Adam to my grandfather - the period of barbarism and the first beginnings of culture; 2) from my grandfather to me - a period of preparation for great achievements that my time should realize; 3) I and the tasks of my time, in which the goal of world history is completed and finally realized.”

The 20th century placed its own emphasis both in relation to “Civilization” and in relation to “Progress”. As Pitirim Sorokin wrote, “practically all significant philosophies of history of our critical age reject progressive-linear interpretations of the historical process and accept either a cyclical, creatively rhythmic, or eschatological, messianic form. Besides the revolt against linear interpretations of history, these social philosophies demonstrate many other changes in the prevailing theories of society... The emerging philosophies of history of our critical age break sharply with the dominant progressivist, positivist and empiricist philosophies of the dying sensitive era." The philosophy of history of A. J. Toynbee is the clearest illustration of Sorokin’s words.

When Toynbee was thirty-three years old, he sketched out a plan for his future work on a half-sheet of concert program. “He was clearly aware that its completion would require at least two million words - twice as many as Edward Gibbon needed for his great work, written over the course of years, on the decline and fall of the Roman Empire.” An idea of ​​​​what could be found many parallels between various historical events and that there is a “kind of human societies that we call “civilizations”” were gradually beginning to take shape in his mind when he accidentally came across “The Decline of Europe” by O. Spengler. In this book, read by Toynbee in German, even before the English translation appeared, he found confirmation of many of his own thoughts, which existed in his mind only in the form of hints and vague guesses. However, Spengler's concept seemed imperfect to Toynbee in several important aspects. The number of civilizations studied (eight) was too small to serve as a basis for a correct generalization. The reasons for the emergence and death of cultures were explained very unsatisfactorily. Finally, Spengler's method was greatly harmed by certain a priori dogmas, which distorted his thought and forced him at times to unceremoniously neglect historical facts. What was required was a more empirical approach, as well as an awareness that there was a problem in explaining the origins and demise of civilizations, and that the solution to this problem must be within the framework of a verifiable hypothesis that would stand the test of facts.

Toynbee constantly characterized his method as essentially “inductive.” Of course, the centuries-old traditions of British empiricism had an effect here. "The History of England" by D. Hume, "The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire" by E. Gibbon, "The Golden Bough" by J. J. Frazer - all these multi-volume works, replete with enormous factual material, are the immediate predecessors of the "Studies of History" . Toynbee's main goal was to try to apply a natural-scientific approach to human relationships and see “how far it would take us.” In carrying out his program, he insisted on the need to consider “society as a whole” as the main units of study, and not “however isolated their parts, like the nation-states of the modern West.” Unlike Spengler, Toynbee singled out in history representatives of a family of “civilizations” (he later reduced their number to 13), not counting the secondary, secondary and underdeveloped ones. To these he included Egyptian, Andean, ancient Chinese-Thai, Minoan, Sumerian, Mayan, Yucatan, Mexican, Hittite, Syrian, Babylonian, Iranian, Arabic, Far Eastern (the main trunk and its branch in Japan), Indus, Hindu, Hellenic, Orthodox -Christian (main trunk and branch in Russia) and Western. Although Toynbee considered this number to be extremely small for solving the task at hand - “explaining and formulating laws.” Nevertheless, he argued that there was a very significant degree of similarity between the achievements of the societies he studied and the societies he compared. In their history, certain stages are clearly distinguishable, following one pattern. This model, according to Toynbee, is expressed too clearly to be ignored - the stage of growth, breakdown, final decay and death.

One of Toynbee’s most fundamental principles was cultural pluralism, the belief in the diversity of forms of social organization of humanity. Each of these forms of social organization has, in his opinion, its own system of values, different from the others. Danilevsky and Spengler spoke about the same thing, but Toynbee remained alien to their biologism in their interpretation of the life of societies as a whole. The English historian rejected the fatal predetermination of the future, imposed on every organism by the law of the life cycle, although biological analogies appear more than once on the pages of his works.

Toynbee describes the main phases of the historical existence of civilization in terms of Henri Bergson’s “philosophy of life”: “emergence” and “growth” are associated with the energy of the “vital impulse” (elan vital), and “breakdown” and “decay” are associated with “ depletion of vitality.” However, not all civilizations go through this path from beginning to end - some of them die before they have time to flourish (“underdeveloped civilizations”), others stop developing and freeze (“arrested civilizations”).

After recognizing the unique path of each civilization, Toynbee proceeds to analyze the historical factors themselves. This is primarily the “law of call-and-response.” Man has reached the level of civilization not due to a superior biological endowment or geographical environment, but as a result of a “response” to a “challenge” in a historical situation of particular complexity, which prompted him to make a hitherto unprecedented attempt. Toynbee divides challenges into two groups - challenges of the natural environment and human challenges. The group related to the natural environment is divided into two categories. The first category includes the stimulating influences of the natural environment, representing various levels of complexity (“stimulus of harsh countries”), the second category includes the stimulating influences of the new land, regardless of the character inherent in the area (“stimulus of the new land”). Toynbee divides the challenges of the human environment into those that are geographically external in relation to the societies that are affected, and those that are geographically coincident with them. The first category includes the impact of societies or states on their neighbors, when both sides start, initially occupying different areas, the second - the impact of one social “class” on another, when both “classes” jointly occupy one area (the term “class” used here in its broadest sense). At the same time, Toynbee distinguishes between an external impulse, when it takes the form of an unexpected blow, and the sphere of its action in the form of constant pressure. Thus, in the field of challenges of the human environment, Toynbee distinguishes three categories: “stimulus of external blows”, “stimulus of external pressures” and “stimulus of internal infringements”.

If the “answer” is not found, anomalies arise in the social organism, which, accumulating, lead to “breakdown”, and then to further “decay”. Developing an adequate response to a changing situation is a social function of the so-called creative minority, which puts forward new ideas and selflessly puts them into practice, drawing others along with them. “All acts of social creativity are the creation either of individual creators or, at most, of creative minorities.”

Within this model, certain periodic “rhythms” can be detected. When a society is at a stage of growth, it gives effective and fruitful responses to the challenges thrown at it. When it is at the stage of decline, it turns out to be unable to take advantage of opportunities and resist or even overcome the difficulties that it faces. However, neither growth nor decay, according to Toynbee, can be permanent or necessarily continuous. For example, in the process of disintegration, the phase of destruction is often followed by a temporary restoration of strength, which, in turn, is followed by a new, even stronger relapse. As an example, Toynbee cites the establishment of a universal state in Rome under Augustus. This period was a time of restoration of the strength of Hellenic civilization between the previous period of the “Time of Troubles” with its uprisings and internecine wars and the first stages of the final collapse of the Roman Empire in the 3rd century. Toynbee argues that clearly distinguishable rhythms of destruction and restoration manifested themselves during the collapse of many civilizations - Chinese, Sumerian, Hindu. At the same time, we are faced with the phenomenon of increasing standardization and loss of creativity - two features that are especially obvious in the decline of Greco-Roman society.

Critics have repeatedly noted Toynbee's desire to interpret the history of other civilizations in terms characteristic of Hellenic culture. Many criticized him for this, believing that this tendency led the scientist to the creation of artificial schemes into which he tried to squeeze all the diversity of human history. For example, P. Sorokin wrote about Toynbee’s theory and similar ones: “Neither real cultural or social systems, nor nations and countries as fields of cultural systems have a simple and uniform life cycle of childhood, maturity, old age and death. The life curve of especially large cultural systems is much more complex, diverse and less homogeneous than the life cycle of an organism. A fluctuation curve with a non-periodic, constantly changing rhythm of ups and downs, essentially repeating eternal themes with constant variations, apparently illustrates the flow of life of large cultural systems and super-systems more correctly than the cycle curve of an organism. In other words, Danilevsky, Spengler and Toynbee saw only “three or four rhythmic beats” in the life process of civilizations: the rhythm of childhood-maturity-old age or spring-summer-autumn-winter. Meanwhile, in the life process of cultural and social systems, many different rhythms coexist: two-beat, three-beat, four-beat and even more complex rhythms, first of one type, then of another...”

Toynbee's later works show that he was very sensitive to criticism of this kind. However, he argued that for the research he was undertaking, it was at least important to start with some kind of model. His main doubts were about whether the model he had chosen was ideally suited for the task at hand and whether it was possible for a future scientist engaged in the comparative study of civilizations to be advised of a better one so that he could use the whole variety of examples to carry out his research, and not just one example.

In defending his position, Toynbee often attacked what he called “antinomian historians”—proponents of the dogma that no pattern of any kind can be found in history. He believed that to deny the existence of models in history means to deny the possibility of writing it, since the model is presupposed by the entire system of concepts and categories that the historian must use if he wants to speak meaningfully about the past.

What kind of models are these? In some of his works, Toynbee suggests that it is necessary to choose between two essentially opposing points of view. Either history as a whole corresponds to a certain unified order and plan (or serves as its manifestation), or it is a “chaotic, disorderly, random flow” that does not lend itself to any reasonable interpretation. As an example of the first point of view, he cites the “Indo-Hellenic” concept of history as “cyclical movement governed by impersonal law”; As an example, the second is the “Judeo-Zoroastrian” concept of history as a movement governed by a supernatural intellect and will. The attempt to combine these two ideas seems to lie at the basis of one's own picture of the human past, as it appears in the last volumes of the Study of History. They explicitly state that the rise and fall of civilizations can be interpreted teleologically.

As he wrote A Study of History, Toynbee changed his views significantly. If in the first volumes he acts as a supporter of complete self-sufficiency and equivalence of civilizations, then in the last volumes he significantly changes his original point of view. As the English historian Christopher Dawson noted regarding the last four volumes of the Inquiry, “Toynbee introduces a new principle which indicates a fundamental change in his earlier views and entails the transformation of his Inquiry into History from a relativistic phenomenology of equivalent cultures along the lines of Spengler to a unified a philosophy of history comparable to that of the idealist philosophers of the 19th century. This change... implies the abandonment of Toynbee's original theory of the philosophical equivalence of civilizations and the introduction of a qualitative principle embodied in the higher religions, considered as representatives of higher types of society, which stand in the same relation to civilizations as the last - to primitive societies."

Trying to introduce elements of progressive development into his concept, Toynbee saw the progress of humanity in spiritual improvement, in religious evolution from primitive animistic beliefs through universal religions to a single syncretic religion of the future. From his point of view, the formation of world religions is the highest product of historical development, embodying cultural continuity and spiritual unity despite the self-sufficient isolation of individual civilizations.

According to Toynbee, “the style of a civilization is the expression of its religion... Religion has been the lifeblood that has given birth to and sustained civilizations—for more than three thousand years in the case of Pharaonic Egypt, and in China from the rise of the Shang State to the fall of the dynasty.” Qing in 1912." The two oldest civilizations, Egyptian and Sumerian, were founded on the potentially rich lands of the Nile Valley and southeastern Iraq. However, these lands had to be made productive through large-scale drainage and irrigation. The transformation of a complex natural environment into a favorable one for life had to be carried out by organized masses of people working in the name of far-reaching goals. This suggests the emergence of leadership and a widespread desire to follow the instructions of leaders. The social vitality and harmony that made such interaction possible must have come from a religious faith shared by both the leaders and the led. “This faith was supposed to be a spiritual force that made it possible to carry out basic public works in the economic sphere, thanks to which an economic surplus product was obtained.”

By religion, Toynbee understood such an attitude to life that creates the opportunity for people to cope with the difficulties of human existence, giving spiritually satisfactory answers to fundamental questions about the mystery of the Universe and the role of man in it, and offering practical instructions regarding life in the Universe. “Every time a people loses faith in their religion, their civilization is subject to local social disintegration and foreign military attack. A civilization that has fallen as a result of the loss of faith is then replaced by a new civilization inspired by another religion.” History provides us with many examples of such substitutions: the fall of Confucian Chinese civilization after the Opium War and the rise of a new Chinese civilization in which Confucianism was replaced by communism; the fall of the pharaonic Egyptian civilization and the Greco-Roman civilization and their replacement by new civilizations inspired by Christianity and Islam; the rebirth of Western Christian civilization into a modern civilization based on the post-Christian “religion of science and progress.” The examples can be continued. Toynbee is convinced that the success or failure of a culture is deeply connected with the religion of the people. The fate of a civilization depends on the quality of the religion on which it is based. This is precisely what explains the modern crisis of the spirit in the West and all the global problems that it has entailed.

When Western man, through the systematic application of technology, gained dominion over nature, his belief in the calling to exploit nature “gave him the green light to satiate his greed to the limit of his now wide and ever-increasing technological capacity. His greed was unchecked by the pantheistic belief that non-human nature is sacred and that, like man himself, it has a dignity that must be respected.”

Residents of the West, having replaced the religion of their ancestors—Christianity—in the 17th century with a post-Christian “faith in science”, abandoned theism, retaining, however, the faith inherited from monotheism in their right to exploit non-human nature. If, under the previous Christian attitude, they believed in the mission of God's workers, who received Divine sanction to exploit nature, subject to honoring God and recognizing Him. “the rights of the owner”, then in the 17th century “the English cut off the head of God, like Charles I: they expropriated the Universe and declared themselves no longer workers, but free owners - absolute owners.” The “religion of science,” like nationalism, spread from the West throughout the globe. Despite national and ideological differences, most modern people are its adherents. It was these post-Christian religions of the Western world of the modern period that led humanity “to its real misfortune.”

What way out does Toynbee see from this situation? It is necessary, he believes, to urgently restore stability in the relationship between man and non-human nature, overturned by the industrial revolution. At the heart of the technological and economic revolutions in the West was a religious revolution, which essentially consisted of replacing pantheism with monotheism. Now modern man must regain his original respect for the dignity of non-human nature. The “correct religion” can contribute to this. Toynbee calls “correct” a religion that teaches respect for the dignity and holiness of all nature, in contrast to “wrong”, which patronizes human greed at the expense of non-human nature.

Toynbi saw the solution to the global problems of modern humanity in pantheism; in particular, he found his ideal of “correct religion” in such a variety of pantheism as Shintoism. However, Shintoism, as Toynbee’s interlocutor, the Buddhist religious leader Daisaku Ikeda, rightly noted, has two faces: explicitly on the surface there is a tendency towards reconciliation with nature, while the implicit tendency is isolation and exclusivity. Perhaps these tendencies are also inherent in other pantheistic religious traditions.

Looking for a panacea for the ills of modern humanity in Japan, Toynbee paradoxically turns out to be short-sighted in relation to Christianity. He sees in Christian monotheism the cause of the fatal changes that led to the modern “religion of science” and man’s violence against nature. However, he attributes to Christianity as a whole those extreme conclusions which were drawn by its Western branch as a result of deviations from the original teaching. Christianity was initially alien to both mechanical anthropocentrism, that is, the radical alienation of man from nature (which in the West led to a consumerist attitude towards it), and proposed in the 20th century. as an alternative, cosmocentrism, which equates man with any phenomenon of the natural cosmos. In relation to nature, orthodox Christianity is characterized by two main motives. Firstly, nature is perceived as a gift from God, which excludes soulless violence against it and the predatory exploitation of its wealth. And secondly, there is awareness of the degraded state of the created world after the Fall, which allows a person to fight world chaos as an untrue manifestation of natural existence and strive for its transformation. The Apostle Paul also wrote: “The creation awaits with hope the revelation of the sons of God, because the creation was subjected to vanity, not voluntarily, but by the will of Him who subdued it, in the hope that the creation itself will be freed from the slavery of corruption into the freedom of the glory of the children of God.” (Rom. 8:19-21). Thus, the soteriological aspect of Christianity and the possibility of a “middle way” completely elude the attention of the historian.

In general, the topic “Toynbee and Christianity” requires additional coverage. At first glance, it may seem that the teleological interpretation of history in Toy-nbi’s late work brings him closer to Christian historiosophy. However, there are a number of significant points in which he diverges from the Christian understanding of history.

The main feature of Christianity as a historical religion lies, according to Toynbee, in its attitude towards suffering. The central dogma of Christianity - the dogma that Divine mercy and Divine compassion moved God, for the salvation of His creatures, to voluntarily "lose" His power and undergo the same suffering that His creatures endure - makes Christianity the historical religion par excellence . “The distinctive meaning which Christianity has given to the Jewish understanding of the nature of God and the character of His relation to men is the proclamation that God is love, and not merely power, and that this same Divine love is manifested in the special encounter of man with God in form of the incarnation and crucifixion (of the passion) of Christ...”

But the Incarnation serves for us not only as evidence that this world has inner and absolute value as an arena of suffering in which God showed His love for His creatures. It simultaneously became an event that gave meaning to history, indicating a goal and direction. This completely changed our understanding of life, freeing us from the power of the cyclical rhythms that existed in the Universe from the rhythms that we encounter in our lives.

The anthropocentric view of the Universe, which originated in the Renaissance and increasingly gained strength with the development of science and technology in modern times, was refuted by this same science. Modern man, like Pascal, is horrified by the mere thought of the endless black and icy expanses of the Universe, opening up to him through a telescope and erasing his life to insignificance. However, “The Incarnation frees us from these alien and demonic forces, convincing us that thanks to the suffering and death of God on this infinitesimal grain of sand (of the universe), the entire physical Universe is theocentric, for if God is love, then man can feel himself everywhere, where the authority of God operates as at home.”

But perhaps the most important thing in Christianity for Toynbee is the fact that the suffering of Christ gave meaning to human suffering, reconciling us with the tragedy of our earthly life, since they “instill in us that this tragedy is not meaningless and aimless evil, as affirmed by Buddha and Epicurus, and not inevitable punishment for deep-rooted sin, as explained by non-Christian schools of Jewish theology. The light of Christ’s passion revealed to us that suffering is necessary insofar as it is a necessary means of salvation and creation in the conditions of a temporary and short life on Earth. In itself, suffering is neither evil nor good, neither meaningless nor meaningful. It is the path leading to death, and its purpose is to give a person the opportunity to participate in the work of Christ, thereby realizing the opportunity to become sons of God, brothers in Christ.”

Critics often attributed Toynbee's complete acceptance (especially in the works of recent years) of Christian historical philosophy, considering him almost the revivalist of the ideas of Augustine the Blessed. This misconception was based on the historian’s frequent quotation of the Holy Scriptures and constant reference to the events of biblical history. However, Toynbee's concept has a number of significant differences with Christian (and in particular with Augustinian) historiosophy. The essence of these discrepancies was once described in sufficient detail by Professor Singer in his study dedicated to the outstanding British historian.

First of all, in his later works, Toynbee essentially denies the uniqueness of Christianity, although he recognizes it as one of the highest religions. He insists that since Christianity is one of the highest religions, it has much to learn from other religions belonging to the same group. If Toynbee once believed that Christianity contained a unique revelation of a single, undivided truth, then over time he began to think that all historical religions and philosophical systems are only partial revelations of truth, and that Buddhism, Hinduism, Islam and Christianity has something to say. This position obviously contradicts both biblical revelation and its Augustinian interpretation.

In fact, as Toynbee wrote his A Study of History, he gradually changed his position, and the first six volumes value Christianity much more highly than the latter, which were written more from the perspective of Buddhism and Hinduism. In many of his later works he leans directly towards Mahayana Buddhism.

Although Toynbee indeed often refers to the Old and New Testaments and values ​​them highly, he is far from treating them as the inspired and inerrant Word of God. For him, the Holy Scriptures are as much a revelation of God as the “sacred scriptures” of other higher religions. Toynbee does not view the Bible as the only reliable revelation given by God to man about Himself. The Bible for him is just one of the ways a person searches for God. Hence the attitude that is often found on the pages of “Study of History” is the Bible as a collection of “Syrian” myths and folklore, along with significant and useful historical data.

Inevitably, this attitude towards Christianity and the Holy Scriptures greatly influenced Toynbee's religious thought. In essence, he denies the biblical teaching of the omnipotence of God, creationism and the orthodox view of original sin. In place of these fundamental orthodox positions, he puts the evolutionary concept of reality in general and man in particular.

Thus, by denying the universal sinfulness of mankind, Toynbee fails to understand the biblical doctrine of atonement. Christ for him is only a noble person who speaks sublime teachings. The idea of ​​atonement for the sins of humanity by the Death on the Cross on Calvary remains completely misunderstood. The whole meaning of Christianity in its soteriological aspects has completely escaped the attention of the historian. Toynbee preaches the usual liberal admiration of Christ as the Great Teacher or one of the Great Teachers, but completely denies that He is the Son of God who went to the Cross to save people.

The cross for Toynbee is a majestic symbol of the suffering of Christ, and Christ Himself becomes an example of the “departure-and-return” in his historical scheme. However, there is no place here for the idea of ​​bodily resurrection in the biblical sense of the word, and the return of Christ from the grave appears only as the arrival of His spirit to the disciples, together with the inspiration transmitted to them, making them capable of spreading the teachings of their Teacher.

Likewise, Toynbee frequently refers to the Church and uses the word as one of the main elements of his historical scheme. But again, his concept of the Church is very far from the biblical view on this issue. The Christian Church for Toynbee is not an organism created by God, sanctified and continuous in time, which includes the elect of all eras, but rather a human institution that arose from the bosom of Hellenic civilization and contributed to the emergence of Western civilization. Obviously, the Toynbean view of the Church is far from what St. Augustine taught in his book “On the City of God.” For Toynbee, the Church (or, as he more often writes, the church, with a lowercase letter) is rather an institution necessary for the emergence and preservation of civilizations, and not the Kingdom of God on earth in the biblical sense.

Finally, Toynbee does not subscribe to biblical eschatology. Civilizations come and go, are born and die, according to his challenge-and-response theory, and since the fall of a civilization can (and probably will) lead to catastrophic consequences, history has no purpose. History has no final goal, and therefore the historical process cannot end with the second coming of Jesus Christ in power and glory.

For Toynbee, as for Hegel, Marx, Spengler and proponents of the concept of “history as a process” in general, the ultimate meaning of history can only be found within the framework of the historical process itself. Although Toynbee tried hard to avoid the pitfalls encountered by Hegel, Marx and Spengler, his attempts ultimately failed because he refused to see that only one omnipotent God could give meaning to His creation and all of history. , the creator of which is. Any attempt to find meaning in a story before it has ended ends in failure.

In conclusion, I would like to say a few words about how Toynbee saw the future of all mankind. In his later works, the historian increasingly turned to contemporary social problems, trying to find a way out of the deep internal contradictions of Western civilization and the conflict between the West and the countries of the “third world”. According to Toinbi, spiritual renewal, a rejection of the absolutization of material values ​​and mercantilist philosophy, and a revival of harmony between man and nature are necessary. At the economic level, the main requirement should be equality and limiting human greed. For the sake of preserving human dignity, Toynbee considers it inevitable to adopt a socialist method of managing the economic affairs of mankind. However, bearing in mind the experience of building socialism in Russia, China and some other countries of the world and the extremes that were associated with the suppression of the spiritual freedom of the individual in these countries, Toynbee says that in the future this is necessary at all costs. began to be avoided. His picture of the future contains an answer both to supporters of the violent construction of an “earthly paradise” and to modern globalists trying to impose a single system of values ​​on the whole world. “My hope for the twenty-first century is that it will see the establishment of a global humanistic society that is socialist on the economic level and freethinking on the spiritual level. Economic freedom for one person or society often entails enslavement for others, but spiritual freedom has no such negative characteristics. Everyone can be spiritually free without encroaching on the freedom of others. It goes without saying that widespread spiritual freedom means mutual enrichment, not impoverishment.”

The future will show how true Professor Toynbee's predictions are and how good a prophet he was. What remains for us, guided by the directions drawn by him, is to try to bring to the shore the sinking ship of modern civilization, on which, like on Noah’s Ark, Western, Russian, Islamic, and Chinese civilizations are inextricably linked by one common fate, and always remember the ease with which they can all join the ranks of the civilizations of Sumer, Egypt, Babylon and many, many others that have disappeared forever without a trace.

Kozhurin K. Ya., Candidate of Philosophy

Hübscher A. Thinkers of our time (62 portraits): A guide to the philosophy of the West of the 20th century. M., 1994. P. 60.

God, History and Historians. An Anthology of Modern Christian Views of History. Ed. by C. T. McClntire. New York, 1977. P. 7.

Frank S. L. Spiritual foundations of society: Introduction to social philosophy // Russian abroad: From the history of social and legal thought. L., 1991. P. 265.

Dawson Ch. Toynbee's Odyssey of the West // The Common-weal, LXI, No. 3 (Oct. 22, 1954). P. 62-67. Toynbee fully agreed with Dawson’s assessment, noting that his opinion about the replacement of the cyclic system with a progressive one was correct (Toynbee A. J. A Study of History. Volume XII. Reconsiderations. London; New York; Toronto, 1961. P. 27).

Nature